A way to settle disputes over the Spratly Islands
Conflicting territorial claims by several countries over the Spratlys and Paracels are raising tensions in Asia. Maps depict the Philippines (especially its Palawan province) physically closest to the disputed areas. But maps can be trumped not only by historical and legal considerations but also by sheer force and political will.
Aside from the Philippines, the claimants are China, Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei. Historical seniority favors China, whose current economic, political and military strength can reinforce its claims. But China’s claims conflict with existing international definitions of territorial sovereignty and exclusive economic zones (EEZs) of countries – and the United Nations is working to help resolve these claims to benefit all concerned.
The din of not-so-polite diplomatese (as in Chinese “scoldings” of other claimants), street-level protests (notably from the newly vocal Vietnamese), ineffectual posturing (by many Philippine politicians) and media spins (by lobbyists and warmongers) is now roiling the waters of the South China Sea (recently renamed the West Philippine Sea by the P-Noy government). As today’s sole superpower and policeman, the United States has the biggest say on the resolution of this complex problem in the short-run. But unless all claimants are proactive partners in the solution, the irritants will remain.
Over a longer term, the solution may lie in the operationalization of the China-Asean Common Market, starting with a China-Asean agreement to develop and manage the disputed islands with Singapore, a non-claimant, as an obvious choice for administrator – and with China and the other Asean claimants tempering their respective ambitions to allow the region to show the rest of the world that all must realize our respective stewardship roles in the affairs of Planet Earth.
Because of its false leaders and apathetic citizenry, the Philippines lost a chance to play the role Singapore can now exercise. But the Philippines can still greatly benefit from the resolution of this problem by simultaneously pursuing its bilateral agreements with China, supporting Singapore’s lead, and winning its internal battles against hunger, poverty and greed.
—JOSE OSIAS,
